Cause Title: Manik Madhukar Sarve & Ors. v. Vitthal Damuji Meher & Ors.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No.3573 of 2024
Judgment Date: August 28, 2024
Quorum/Bench: Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
"Courts while granting bail are required to consider relevant factors such as nature of the accusation, role ascribed to the accused concerned, possibilities/chances of tampering with the evidence and/or witnesses, antecedents, flight risk et al. [Para 19]"
The Court observed as "Speaking through Hima Kohli, J., the present coram in Ajwar v Waseem, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 974, apropos relevant parameters for granting bail, observed:
“26. While considering as to whether bail ought to be granted in a matter involving a serious criminal offence, the Court must consider relevant factors like the nature of the accusations made against the accused, the manner in which the crime is alleged to have been committed, the gravity of the offence, the role attributed to the accused, the criminal antecedents of the accused, the probability of tampering of the witnesses and repeating the offence, if the accused are released on bail, the likelihood of the accused being unavailable in the event bail is granted, the possibility of obstructing the proceedings and evading the courts of justice and the overall desirability of releasing the accused on bail."
"In cases where the allegations coupled with the materials brought on record by the investigation and in the nature of economic offence affecting a large number of people reveal the active role of the accused seeking anticipatory or regular bail, it would be fit for the Court granting such bail to impose appropriately strict and additional conditions.[Para 25]"
Appellant's Submission: The High Court erred in not appreciating the role of the respondent no.1/accused as stated in the charge-sheet and record of the case, and should not have released him on bail.
Respondent's Submission: There is no substantial material on record to prove any kind of agreement between respondent no.1 and the main accused/President of the Society, and the respondent is innocent and falsely implicated.
Court's Observation: The High Court erred in law by not considering the nature of the alleged offence and its impact on victims, and by imposing only usual conditions without strict additional conditions.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's bail order, directing the respondent to surrender within three weeks. The Court emphasized the need for strict scrutiny in economic offences affecting large numbers of people and the importance of imposing appropriate conditions when granting bail in such cases.
Comments